To explore whether prostatectomized men report improved post-operative erectile function and urinary control dependent on the application of intra-operative frozen section examination (NeuroSAFE) during nerve-sparing radical prostatectomies (NS-RPs). Methods: Pre-and post-RP responses to the sexual domain and the urinary incontinence subscale of EPIC-26 were analyzed in 95 and 312 men from a NeuroSAFEGroup (Martini-Klinik, Hamburg, Germany) and a Non-NeuroSAFE Group (Oslo University Hospital, Norway), undergoing NS-RPs for ≤cT2 prostate cancer. All patients had intra-prostatic tumors as evaluated by Digital Rectal Examination. Statistical significance in bivariate and multi-variable analyses: p<0.05. Results: With similar oncological outcomes and not associated with the performance of bilateral or unilateral NS-RP within each group patients from the NeuroSAFE Group had better sexuality outcomes than those from the NonNeuroSAFE Group (p<0.01). Age and pre-RP sexual function represented significant co-variables. In pre-RP potent men, erectile function was preserved in 74% men of the NeuroSAFE Group and in 46% in those from the NonNeuroSAFE Group (p<0.01). Any superior continence-saving effect of NeuroSAFE was limited.. The non-randomized small-sized observational study design represents the observations' main limitation. Conclusions: Our study indicates that NeuroSAFE contributes to preservation of post-RP erectile function. If confirmed in a randomized trial the NeuroSAFE should be applied in patients undergoing NS-RP for maximal preservation of post-RP sexual function.
Background
The association between curative treatment (CurTrt) and mortality in senior adults (≥70 years) with high‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) is poorly documented. In a population‐based cohort we report temporal trends in treatment and PCa‐specific mortality (PCSM), investigating the association between CurTrt and mortality in senior adults with high‐risk PCa, compared to findings in younger men (<70 years).
Methods
Observational study from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Patients with high‐risk PCa were stratified for three diagnostic periods (2005‐08, 2009‐12 and 2013‐16), age (<70, vs ≥70) and primary treatment (CurTrt: Radical prostatectomy (RP), Radiotherapy (RAD) vs no curative treatment (NoCurTrt)). Competing risk and Kaplan‐Meier methods estimated PCSM and overall mortality (OM), respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated odds for CurTrt, and multivariable Fine Gray and Cox regression models evaluated the hazard ratios for PCSM and OM.
Results
Of 19 763 evaluable patients, 54% were aged ≥70 years. Senior adults had more unfavorable PCa characteristics than younger men. Across diagnostic periods, use of CurTrt increased from 15% to 51% in men aged ≥70 and 65% to 81% in men aged < 70 years. With median five years follow‐up, PCSM decreased in all patients (P < .05), in the third period restricted to senior adults. In all patients NoCurTrt was associated with three‐fold higher 5‐year PCSM and two‐fold higher OM compared to CurTrt.
Conclusions
In high‐risk PCa patients, increased use of CurTrt, greatest in senior men, was observed along with decreased PCSM and OM in both senior and younger adults. CurTrt should increasingly be considered in men ≥70 years.
For all patients, the 10-year OM was about 3 times higher than PCSM, the greatest and lowest discrepancies emerging among patients with low- and high-risk tumors, respectively. The results support increased use of local treatment in high-risk patients. GGGs should be implemented in clinical practice. The role of ECOG performance status as prognostic factor has to be validated in future studies.
Background
The results of studies evaluating the impact of positive surgical margins on prostate cancer‐specific mortality have been inconsistent. We, therefore, evaluated the impact of surgical margin status on subsequent secondary treatment, palliative radiotherapy, and prostate cancer‐specific mortality.
Methods
A total of 14 837 men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) during the period 2001 to 2015 were identified from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Of those, 13 198 (89%) patients had complete data on the preoperative prostate‐specific antigen level, pathological T‐category, Gleason score in the prostatectomy specimen, and margin status. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the risk, and flexible parametric models for the cumulative incidence were fitted to predict the probabilities of secondary treatment (salvage radiotherapy or prophylactic breast radiation), palliative radiotherapy, and prostate cancer‐specific mortality.
Results
After a median follow‐up time of 5.2 years (3591 patients with ≥8 years of follow‐up), positive surgical margins (PSMs) were independently predictive of secondary treatment (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.21‐2.66) and palliative radiotherapy (HR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.03‐2.05). After 10 years, the absolute increased risk for palliative radiotherapy in patients with PSMs after RP varied between 0.1% in pT2 tumors with a Gleason score of 6, to 12% for pT3b tumors with a Gleason score of 9 to 10. PSMs were not independently associated with prostate cancer‐specific mortality (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.82‐1.59).
Conclusion
PSMs were associated with increased application of secondary treatment and palliative radiotherapy but were not predictive of prostate cancer‐specific mortality. As the use of palliative radiotherapy was only marginally increased in patients with PSMs and the lowest‐risk disease characteristics, avoiding PSMs may be of greatest prognostic relevance in patients with higher‐risk disease characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.